U.S. Attorney Scandal: How Far Does It Go?

10:04 pm EST March 9th, 2007 | News | 9 Comments

We are going to find out because the rubber stamp congress is gone.

A congressional investigation into the firings of eight U.S. attorneys reached into the White House on Friday, with Democrats saying that they’ll call in President Bush’s former counsel Harriet Miers and other unidentified White House officials for interviews with the House Judiciary Committee.

Lawmakers have been asking whether the federal prosecutors’ offices have become tainted by partisan politics. Until Friday, the official inquiry had ended with the Justice Department.

The decision to extend the inquiry to Bush’s inner circle suggests that lawmakers believe there may have been some level of coordination of the firings from inside the White House last December.

Topic:

Related Posts

«
»

9 Responses to “U.S. Attorney Scandal: How Far Does It Go?”

  1. goalkeeper says:
    March 9, 2007 at 10:35 pm

    Oliver:

    Look North to New Jersey. (I know it’s hard, but you’re a profesional!) Remember the Menedez-Kean Senate campaign? Do you remember the issuance of subpoenas to investigate people close to Menendez? Do you remember hearing anything else about the alleged scandal?

    Me neither. (I forget which site I found this tidbit on, but I’d start with TPM Cafe!)

  2. pedromd07 says:
    March 10, 2007 at 12:09 am

    Wait a second….are you saying that poitically appointed Attorney’s General are…Political?

    The hell you say!?

    Another newsflash from the party that fired every single attorneys general when they took over.

    Luckily the democrats are working 5 days a week, so they’ll have time to hold more hearings on the fact that politics is political…instead of wasting their time on things like the war.

    oh, wait a sec…they ARE’NT working 5 day weeks….

    I guess they are going to have to give up another “non-binding” resolution, and send the nutroots over the edge..

  3. Wilbur says:
    March 10, 2007 at 5:02 am

    Wait a second….are you saying that poitically appointed Attorney’s General are…Political?

    Yes they are political, but there is, or should be a limit to which the justice system is prostituted for political aims.

    The fact that you don’t recognize any limits is typical for a republican. Just as, for you, the point of “national security” is not protecting the country but embarrassing democrats.

    Pressuring a US attorney to rush an indictment for political purposes then firing the attorney when he refuses is over the line.

    If there’s any evidence (apart from the speculation of Clinton-deranged wingnuts) that Reno had similar motives for cleaning the decks of US attorneys in 1993 then I would say that was wrong too.

  4. midderpidge says:
    March 10, 2007 at 7:53 am

    Not to mention the attorneys that aren’t fired are the ones willing to play ball with the extreme political requests of the Republican party.

  5. pedromd07 says:
    March 10, 2007 at 10:38 am

    Of course the alternative possibility is that these attorneys weren’t actually doing their jobs….

  6. Duros62 says:
    March 10, 2007 at 12:00 pm

    Pe4dro, please shut up. Nobody fired Attorneys General. AGs are elected offices.

  7. midderpidge says:
    March 10, 2007 at 12:26 pm

    Since your alternative possiblity has been shot down, Pedo, I guess you have to accept fired for political reasons.

    Of course, they did say one of the fired Attorney’s had attendence problems. Maybe he was fired for that. Damn reservists.

  8. merlallen says:
    March 10, 2007 at 1:03 pm

    god! is pedro stupid on purpose? sometimes I think all wingnuts are.

  9. pedromd07 says:
    March 10, 2007 at 3:42 pm

    u knew what I meant, US attorneys.